Not upheld: scam reimbursement and fraud protection failure complaint against Revolut

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A fell victim to an employment scam involving cryptocurrency investment after being contacted by a scammer offering social media tasks. He made faster payments totalling less than £100 and exchanged fiat currency into cryptocurrency using funds borrowed from family and friends. Revolut declined to reimburse the faster payments citing their £100 excess and refused to refund cryptocurrency withdrawals as ineligible. The ombudsman found that while Mr A was unemployed and in financial difficulties, he was not a Vulnerable Consumer under the reimbursement rules because he retained the ability to protect himself. The ombudsman also found that the payment values were too small to warrant intervention by Revolut under good industry practice standards, and no recovery mechanism existed for cryptocurrency. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the FPS Reimbursement Rules, which allow PSPs to deduct up to £100 excess unless the customer qualifies as a Vulnerable Consumer. Although Mr A was unemployed and in financial difficulties, the ombudsman found his ability to protect himself was not affected by these circumstances, as he conducted some research and asked others about the opportunity's legitimacy. The payment values were too small to trigger suspicion under good industry practice standards. The ombudsman balanced Revolut's obligation to prevent financial harm against the proportionality of intervention given the high volume of legitimate cryptocurrency transactions Revolut processes daily.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website